저 시-비 리- 경 지 2.0 한민

는 아래 조건 르는 경 에 한하여 게

l 저 물 복제, 포, 전송, 전시, 공연 송할 수 습니다.

다 과 같 조건 라야 합니다:

l 하는, 저 물 나 포 경 , 저 물에 적 된 허락조건 명확하게 나타내어야 합니다.

l 저 터 허가를 면 러한 조건들 적 되지 않습니다.

저 에 른 리는 내 에 하여 향 지 않습니다.

것 허락규약(Legal Code) 해하 쉽게 약한 것 니다.

Disclaimer

저 시. 하는 원저 를 시하여야 합니다.

비 리. 하는 저 물 리 목적 할 수 없습니다.

경 지. 하는 저 물 개 , 형 또는 가공할 수 없습니다.

보건학석사 학위논문

Characterization of Firefighter Exposures

According to Task in Fireplace

화재현장에서 소방관 직무에 따른

유해인자 노출 특성

2014 년 8 월

서울대학교 보건대학원

환경보건학과 산업보건전공

진 수 현

Characterization of Firefighter Exposures

According to Task in Fireplace

화재현장에서 소방관 직무에 따른 유해인자

노출 특성

지도교수 윤 충 식

이 논문을 보건학석사 학위논문으로 제출함

2014 년 4 월

서울대학교 보건대학원

환경보건학과 산업보건전공

진 수 현

진수현의 보건학석사 학위논문을 인준함

2014 년 6 월

위 원 장 백 도 명 (인)

부 위 원 장 조 경 덕 (인)

위 원 윤 충 식 (인)

ABSTRACT

Characterization of Firefighter Exposures

According to Task in Fireplace

Suhyun Jin

Department of Environmental Health

Graduate School of Public Health

Seoul National University, Korea

Advisor Chungsik Yoon, Ph.D., CIH

Objective The high mortality rates and safety and health problems among

firefighters have gained attention and highlighted the need to improve safety.

Firefighters are known to be exposed to a variety of toxic and carcinogenic

substances such as benzene, benzo(a)pyrene, and asbestos. The International

Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies firefighters as Group 2B

(potentially cancer-causing occupation). Although firefighters are classified as

a high-risk group, little information is available about the hazardous agents

they are exposed to during fire extinguishing activities. The aim of this study

was to evaluate firefighter exposure to these hazardous agents during various

fire extinguishing tasks.

Methods Personal breathing zone samples of polynuclear aromatic

hydrocarbons (PAHs), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene (BTEX),

metals, particulates, and asbestos were collected from firefighters to

characterize firefighter exposure levels. We classified firefighting tasks into

fire extinguishing, overhaul, and fire investigation activities. A total of 14 fire

activities were surveyed in this study: five fire extinguishing, six overhaul,

and three fire investigations. Sampling areas included a laundry, outlet store,

temporary building, underground parking lot, sauna in a public bath,

apartment, printing house, restaurant congested buildings.

Results Firefighters were exposed to carcinogenic substances such as PAH,

benzene, benzo(a)pyrene, and asbestos. Although no substance exceeded the

ACGIH TLV, PAHs were detected in every sample. Naphthalene (Group 2B

by the IARC) ranged from 0.24~279.13 mg/m3 (median 49.6 mg/m3) and

benzo(a)pyrene was detected in one overhaul case at 10.85 µg/m3. Benzene

(0.01–12.2 ppm) was detected in every task and exceeded the ACGIH TLV

(0.5 ppm) at two fire extinguishing, two overhaul, and one fire investigation

activity. Respirable particles were detected (0.08–7.55 mg/m3) and exceeded

the ACGIH TLV (3 mg/m3) at two fire extinguishing and one overhaul case.

Conclusion These results indicate that all firefighting tasks generated

various hazardous combustion products, including known and possible

carcinogens and particulate matter. Peak exposure to benzene and respirable

particles may be very high during all three kinds of tasks. Although the

environment during overhaul and fire investigation may not appear dangerous,

firefighters are actually exposed to a variety of hazardous substances.

Key word: Firefighters exposure, Overhaul, Investigation,

Characterization of hazards during fire

Student ID: 2012-21849

Contents

ABSTRACT······························································i

Contents·································································iii

List of Tables·····························································v

1. Introduction ................................................................................... 8

2. Materials and methods................................................................ 11

2.1.Survey outline ........................................................................... 11

2.2.Sampling and analytical methods............................................ 14

2.3.Quality control .......................................................................... 18

3. Results .......................................................................................... 21

4. Discussion ..................................................................................... 30

5. Conclusion .................................................................................... 36

6. References .................................................................................... 37

Appendix ............................................................................................. 41

국문초록

List of Tables

Table 1. Information on the sampling substance ································ 12

Table 2. OELs and IARC carcinogenic grades for major toxic substances

targeted in this study ······················································ 13

Table 3. Analytical method and media and instrument ························· 17

Table 4. Summary of the measured firefighting area ··························· 22

Table 5. PAH concentration according to the task ······························ 24

Table 6. VOC concentrations according to the task ····························· 25

Table 7. Metals concentrations according to the task ··························· 26

Table 8. Particulates concentrations according to the task ····················· 27

Table 9. Asbestos concentrations according to the task ························ 27

Table 10. The result of comparison of two tasks ································ 28

Table 11. Confinement state associated with concentrations ·················· 29

Table 12. Comparison of preceding firefighters exposure studies with this study

and health effects of substances ········································· 33

List of Appendix

Appendix 1. Xad-2 and filter concentration of PAH during fire extinguish · 41

Appendix 2. Xad-2 and filter concentration of PAH during overhaul ········ 42

Appendix 3. Xad-2 and fi l ter concentration of PAH during fire

investigation ······························································ 43

Appendix 4. Recovery efficiency of metals ······································ 44

Appendix 5. Desorption efficiency of BTEX ···································· 44

Appendix 6. Summary data for fire extinguishing PAHs samples ············ 45

Appendix 7. Summary data for overhaul PAHs samples ······················· 46

Appendix 8. Summary data for investigation PAHs samples ·················· 47

Appendix 9. Summary data for fire extinguishing VOCs samples ············ 48

Appendix 10. Summary data for overhaul VOCs samples ····················· 48

Appendix 11. Summary data for fire extinguishing VOCs samples ·········· 48

Appendix 12. Summary data for fire extinguishing metals samples ·········· 49

Appendix 13. Summary data for overhaul metals samples ····················· 49

Appendix 14. Summary data for investigation metals samples ················ 50

Appendix 15. Summary data for fire extinguishing particulate samples ····· 51

Appendix 16. Summary data for overhaul particulate samples ················ 51

Appendix 17. Summary data for investigation particulate samples ··········· 51

Appendix 18. Summary of Sample site concentration ·························· 52

8

1. Introduction

Firefighters are exposed to various risks such as falling, collision, high

temperatures, and harmful gases. Recently, the risks have increased as

residential spaces and industrial buildings are being built taller or

underground as a result of dense populations and facilities. Additionally, the

use of new construction materials may release unknown harmful gases with

high toxicity(Jung, 2008). Safety and health problems have been increasing

among firefighters, such as musculoskeletal disorders caused by exposure to

heavy materials, which have highlighted the need for safety improvement.

Firefighters perform various tasks within these harmful environments, such as

emergency rescue, first aid, and fire extinguishing. Yong(2008) analyzed

causes of death in the line of duty among firefighters over a 16-year period

(1993–2008) in Korea: 87 of 189 (46%) deaths were caused by internal

diseases, followed by vehicle accidents (24%), fire extinguishing (13%), and

safety accidents (8%).Of the firefighters who died from internal diseases, 63%

had brain cardiovascular disease and 30% had cancer. Direct causes of brain

cardiovascular disease for firefighters include excessive physical activity, high

temperatures, emotional stress, and inhalation of harmful gases present in fire

and smoke(Han, 2008). Inhaling carbon monoxide at the scene of a fire is

known to have a direct effect on cardiovascular disorders(Guidotti, 1992), and

exposure to fine dust(Baxter, 2010) and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons

are both associated with cardiovascular disorders(Peters et al., 1997; Timonen

et al., 2006). Damage to respiratory organs caused by inhaling smoke from

9

fires is the primary cause of death and disease morbidity in

firefighters(Rabinowitz, 2002). Cancer accounts for 30% of deaths in the line

of duty, and firefighters are exposed to carcinogenic substances such as

benzene, benzo(a)pyrene, asbestos, and formaldehyde(Kim, 2008). Foreign

studies have reported that multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,

prostate cancer, and testicular cancer are related to firefighting activities. Skin,

brain, anal, oral, pharyngeal, stomach and colon cancer, as well as malignant

melanoma and leukemia, may be related to firefighting activities(LeMasters et

al., 2006). The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has

conducted meta-analyses of cancer among firefighters. They found that the

rates of testicular cancer, prostate cancer, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma were

significantly increased in firefighters, and the IARC has classified firefighters

as Group 2B (potentially cancer-causing occupation) (IARC, 2010). Recent

cohort studies have demonstrated that exposure to polynuclear aromatic

hydrocarbons and asbestos is related to an increased risk of prostate cancer,

skin cancer, and lung cancer(Pukkala, 2013), as well as to respiratory cancer

and malignant mesothelioma(Daniels, 2013).

In 2007, a national study investigated chemical exposure among firefighters

at the scene of a fire; it included fire extinguishing and overhaul tasks. In

2011, a national study focused on chemical exposure during fire

extinguishing. Foreign studies have focused on exposure of firefighters in

various scenarios, such as forest fires(Miranda, 2012; Reisen, 2008) and large

building fires (Dawn, 2010).

10

In sum, although many studies have focused on firefighters using an

occupational matrix, few have examined exposure to harmful factors during

the fire extinguishing process. No studies have classified firefighting tasks

into fire extinguishing, overhaul, and fire investigation tasks. Therefore, the

objective of this study was to assess the harmful substances firefighters are

exposed to during three kinds of tasks: fire extinguishing (general

extinguishing activities and prevention of spreading); overhaul (finding and

extinguishing any remaining flames or charcoals inside the walls, ceiling, and

floor after a fire has been extinguished); and fire investigation (identifying the

cause of the fire and estimating damage through data collection and fire

investigation, which may involve questioning, on-site verification,

recognition, and valuation).

.

11

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Survey outline

This study focused on fire scenes attended by the K fire station, which had

the most mobilizations during 2011 in Seoul (S. M. F. D., 2012). K fire

station attended 362 fire accidents, making it the busiest of the 22 fire stations

administered by the Seoul Metropolitan Fire Headquarters or any other station

in Korea. The jurisdiction of K station includes dense residential areas, large-

scale high-rise buildings, and cultural facilities at a high risk for accidents.

From January 21–February 15, 2013, researchers were on standby with

firefighters and accompanied them on the first fire truck mobilized to the

scene. Sampling media were preloaded prior to arriving at the scene; at the

scene, we removed filter plugs and broke sampling tubes. After arriving at

each scene, the situation and scale of the accident was examined: simple

smoke generation and small-scale fire accidents were excluded from research

samples because there was insufficient time for sampling. Collected samples

were classified into fire extinguishing, overhaul, and fire investigation tasks,

based on the opinions of firefighters on the scene about the conditions and

activities of a live fire scene.

We selected target substances to examine at fire locations based on previous

national and international research; Tables 1 and 2 list the target substances

and summaries of published OELs and IARC carcinogenic grades for major

toxic substances.

12

Table 1. Information on the sampling substance

Type Substance

PAHs

Naphthalene, Acenaphthylene, Acenaphthene,

Fluorene, Phenanthrene, Anthracene, Fluoranthene,

Pyrene, Benzo(a)anthrancene, Chrysene,

Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene,

Benzo(a)pyrene, Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene,

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene, Benzo(g,h,I)perylene

Particulates

Total suspended particulate, Respirable particles,

Asbestos

Metals Be, Cd, Co, Cr, Mn, Pb, As, Cu

VOCs Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl benzene, Xylene

13

Table 2. OELs and IARC carcinogenic grades for major toxic substances

targeted in this study

Substance

Permissible

Exposure

Limits

(STEL**)

NIOSH REL

TWA

(STEL**)

ACGIH

TWA*

(STEL**)

IARC***

Naphthalene 50 mg/m³ (75

mg/m³) 50 mg/m³ (75

mg/m³) 52 mg/m³ (79

mg/m³) Group 2B

Acenaphthene - - - Group 3

Fluorene - - - Group 3

Phenanthrene - - - Group 3

Anthracene - - - Group 3

Fluoranthene - - - Group 3

Pyrene - - - Group 3

Chrysene - - - Group 2B

Benzo(a)pyrene - - - Group 1

Benzene 1 ppm (5 ppm) 0.1 ppm (1 ppm) 0.5 ppm (2.5 ppm) Group 1

Toluene 50 ppm (150 ppm) 100 ppm (150 ppm) 20 ppm Group 3

Ethyl benzene 100 ppm (125 ppm) 100 ppm (125 ppm) 20 ppm Group 2B

Xylene - 100 ppm (150 ppm) 100 ppm (150 ppm) Group 3

Beryllium 0.002 mg/m³ (0.01

mg/m³) 0.005 mg/m³ 0.00005 mg/m³ Group 1

Cadmium 0.01 mg/m³ - 0.01 mg/m³ Group 1

Coblat 0.02 mg/m³ 0.05 mg/m³ 0.02 mg/m³ Group 2B

Chromium 0.5 mg/m³ 0.5 mg/m³ 0.5 mg/m³ Group 3

Manganese 1 mg/m³ 1 mg/m³ (3 mg/m³) 0.2 mg/m³ -

Lead 0.05 mg/m³ 0.05 mg/m³ 0.05 mg/m³ Group 2B

Arsenic 0.01 mg/m³ 0.002 mg/m³ 0.01 mg/m³ Group 1

Copper 1 mg/m³ 1 mg/m³ 1 mg/m³ -

Asbestos 0.1 fiber/cm3 0.1 fiber/cm3 0.1 fiber/cm3 Group 1

Total suspended

particulate

10 mg/m³ - 10 mg/m³ -

Respirable

particles - - 3 mg/m³ -

*Time Weighted Average(TWA) : The time-weighted average concentration limit for a normal 8-hour

workday and a 40-hour workweek to which nearly all workers may be repeatedly exposed, day after

day, without adverse effect

**Short Time Exposure Limit(STEL) : A 15 minute TWA exposure that should not be exceeded at any

time during a workday, even if the 8-hour TWA is within the TLV-TWA

***International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)

Group 1 : carcinogenic to humans, Group 2A : Probably carcinogenic to humans, Group 2B : possibly

carcinogenic to humans, Group 3 : not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity in humans, Group 4 :

Probably not carcinogenic to humans.

14

2.2. Sampling and analytical methods

We monitored the personal exposure of firefighters to the target substances

during their various tasks. The firefighters wearing the sampling equipment

did not directly perform firefighting activities, but instead shadowed working

firefighters or positioned themselves in rooms during firefighting activities.

Considering the occupational requirement for vigorous activity and large

movements at fire scenes, pumps were placed inside the bag to minimize

limiting firefighter activity and the tube was put outside of the bag to be

within the breathing zone of the researcher. Air sampling pumps were charged

and calibrated every day.

Researchers classified activities at the fire scene as fire extinguishing,

overhaul, and fire investigation, and collected firefighter personal exposure

samples. Each sample was recorded with its location, sample time, and

sampling duration. Any samples that could be lost due to volatilization were

maintained in a cooler before being moved to the laboratory.

Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

PAH samples were collected using a high-volume flow rate pump (GilAir-5

Air, Gilian, USA) equipped with a PTFE filter (2.0 μm, 37 mm, Gelman

Zefluor, Milipore, USA) and connected to a XAD-2 (150 mg/75 mg, SKC,

USA) using PVC tubing. The pumps were calibrated to 2.0 L/min. The filter

and XAD-2 were wrapped in aluminum foil to protect against light exposure.

Samples were shipped to the laboratory in an insulated container with bagged

15

refrigerant after collection. Samples were analyzed according to the NIOSH

method 5515 using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS).

BTEX

BTEX samples were collected using a low-volume flow rate pump (LFS113,

Gillian, USA) equipped with Coconut Charcoal Tubes (SKC, USA). Pumps

were calibrated to 0.2 L/min. Samples were shipped to the laboratory in an

insulated container with bagged refrigerant after collection. Samples were

collected and analyzed according to the NIOSH method 1501 using GC-FID.

Metals

Metals samples were collected using PVC filter (0.5 μm, SKC, USA) with a

high volume pump to evaluate metal concentrations. The pumps were

calibrated to 2.0 L/min. Samples were collected and analyzed according to the

NIOSH method 7300 using ICP-OES (inductively coupled plasma-optical

emission spectroscopy; ICP- OES, Perkin Elmer, USA).

Particulates

Total suspended particulates (TSP) and respirable particle concentrations were

presented as gravimetric measurements. TSP sampling was performed using

the NIOSH method 0500 with a high-volume pump calibrated to 2.0 L/min

and PVC filter. For respirable particles, an aluminum cyclone (SKC, USA)

pump was calibrated to 2.5 L/min with a high-volume pump. Respirable

16

particles samples were monitored in accordance with NIOSH method 0600.

Filters were weighed before and after the sampling using a microbalance with

a detection limit of 0.001 mg (XP6, Mettler Toledo, USA). Asbestos was

monitored in accordance with the NIOSH method 7400 using MCE COWL

0.8 µm pore size filters (SKC, USA). Samples were analyzed using phase

contrast microscopy (PCM).

17

Table 3. Analytical method and media and instrument

Analyte Media Flow

rate

(LPM)

Analysis Ref.

Method

PAHs

37 mm, 2 ㎛

PTFE +washed

XAD-2

2.0 GC/MS NIOSH

5515

BTEX Charcoal 0.2 GC/FID NIOSH

1501

Metals PVC filter in 3

piece cassette 2.0 ICP -OES

NIOSH

7300

Total

suspended

particulate

PVC filter in 3

piece cassette 2.0

Gravimetric

method

NIOSH

0500

Respirable

dust

PVC filter +

Aluminum

cyclone

2.5 Gravimetric

method

NIOSH

0600

Asbestos MCE in 28 mm

cassette 2.0 PCM

NIOSH

7400

18

2.3. Quality control

We performed quality control to assess the accuracy and precision of our

analyses. For gaseous substances, reproducibility of the analytical instrument

and recovery of spiked sample were evaluated; Appendix 1 lists the results.

The limit of detection (LOD) was calculated by multiplying by 3.14 standard

deviations of seven replicates of the lowest standard solution. Samples below

the LOD were classified as ND (not detected).

LODs were as follows: PAHs; naphthalene 0.0448, acenaphthylene 0.0912

µg/m3, acenaphthene 0.0400 µg/m3, fluorene 0.0075 µg/m3, phenanthrene

0.0032 µg/m3, anthracene 0.0031 µg/m3, fluoranthene 0.0082 µg/m3, pyrene

0.0053 µg/m3, benzo(a)anthrancene 0.0054 µg/m3, chrysene 0.0041 µg/m3,

benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0041 µg/m3, benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0053 µg/m3,

benzo(a)pyrene 0.0049 µg/m3, indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.0049 µg/m3,

dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene 0.0048 µg/m3, and benzo(g,h,l)perylene 0.0048

µg/m3. VOCs; benzene 0.002119 ppm, toluene 0.000379 ppm, ethylbenzene

0.001585 ppm, m,p-xylene 0.00113 ppm and o-xylene 0.000505 ppm. Metals;

Be 0.03482 mg/m3, Cd 0.00421 mg/m3, Co 0.00767 mg/m3, Cr 0.00262

mg/m3, Mn 0.00434 mg/m3, Pb 0.04450 mg/m3, As 0.03482 mg/m3, and Cu

0.00316 mg/m3.

Quality control of TSP and respirable particles was performed as follows.

Before measurement and analysis, all samples were stored in a desiccator for

at least 48 hours to avoid moisture adsorption. All filters were weighed three

times and the average weight was used as the filter weight for quality

19

assurance during the sampling procedure. Static electricity was controlled by

treating filters on static elimination ES-100 (SDION, KOREA) prior to

weighing.

Quality control of asbestos was performed using the laboratory completed

asbestos control program by the Korea Occupational Safety and Health

Agency.

20

2.4. Statistical analysis

To examine differences in exposure levels between fire extinguishing and

overhaul, the Mann-Whitney U test was performed. A multiple regression

analysis was also performed to examine any correlations between

concentration and task, confinement state, burnt area size, number of people

mobilized, work time, number of equipment mobilized, amount of damage,

and building material. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS-21.0

(IBM Statistics).

21

3. Results

Personal breathing zone samples were collected from firefighters to

characterize their exposure levels. Samples were collected at eight fires near

the K fire station in Seoul during the study period (January 21–February 15,

2013). Locations included a laundry, outlet store, temporary building,

underground parking lot, sauna in a public bath, apartment, printing house,

restaurant congested buildings. Table 4 lists information about the fire scenes.

Eight fire scenes were examined, including five fire extinguishing, six

overhaul, and three fire investigation activities.

PAHs, BTEX, metals, particulates, and asbestos were measured; 14 samples

were collected during the five fire extinguishing, six overhaul, and three fire

investigation cases. Sampling times ranged from 10–54 minutes.

The firefighting situations differed at every location, so there were

limitations in measuring the series of each fire activity in all samples.

Concentrations of substances differed by extreme values, which heavily

influenced averages, so we used median values instead of average values for

accuracy.

22

Table 4. Summary of the measured firefighting area

Location

Factors of fire scene

Fire

extinguishing

Overhaul Investigati

on

confi

neme

nt

state

Combusted material Size

(m2)

Laundry ×

Laundry room fire to

structure

, Electronic Vapor Recovery

System, Clothing

244.44 ○ ○ ×

Outlet store × Clothing,Fabric

Upholstery material,

Steel reinforcement 599.85 ○ ○ ×

Apartment ○ Pipe insulation film

materials, Household ceiling

spaces, Textiles 4 × ○ ×

Temporary

Building ×

Refrigerator, TV, furniture,

Household items, steel

reinforcement 150 ○ ○ ×

Printing

house ×

Boxes, Plastic, Paper

Printing Machine 1243 × × ○

Underground

Parking lot × Plastic, Paper, Car - ○ ○ ×

Sauna in

Public bath ○

Wood, pipe, Radiator, steel

reinforcement

100,49

6.73 ○ ○ ○

Restaurant

congested

buildings

× Contents of kitchen,

concrete structure, steel

reinforcement 3896 × × ○

○ samples acquired

× no samples

- no data

23

Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

Of the 16 PAHs, naphthalene was detected during all fire extinguishing and

overhaul activities. Other compounds detected during fire extinguishing

included benzo(a)anthrancene, chrysene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene,

fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene

benzo(a)anthrancene, chrysene, indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, and

benzo(g,h,i)perylene. Compounds detected during overhaul included

naphthalene, acenaphthylene, fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene,

fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthrancene, chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene,

benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene

dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene, and benzo(g,h,i)perylene. Compounds detected

during fire investigation included naphthalene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene,

fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene, chrysene,

indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene, and benzo(g,h,i)perylene.

Table 5 lists PAH concentrations according to asks.

24

Table 5. PAH concentration according to the task

PAHs Fire extinguishing (N=5) Overhaul (N=6) Investigation (N=3)

Median

(µg/m³)

Range

(µg/m³)

Median

(µg/m³)

Range

(µg/m³)

Median

(µg/m³)

Range

(µg/m³)

Naphthalene 93.95 6.22-2082.6 49.59 0.24-279.13 320.22 17.43-623.01

Acenaphthylene 24.79 13.32-120.10 10.40 1.11-28.01 33.42** -

Acenaphthene 7.28** - ND* - 2.81** -

Fluorene 2.59 0.28-24.87 2.05 0.17-5.46 6.10** -

Phenanthrene 1.09 0.35-17.29 22.07 11.06-43.46 2.18 0.92-3.44

Anthracene 2.30 1.69-2.92 6.73 1.38-12.09 0.97** -

Fluoranthene 0.63 0.45-3.27 16.94 4.99-44.14 0.78** -

Pyrene 0.44 0.22-1.97 11.34 0.67-34.89 0.27 0.13-0.4

Benzo(a)anthrancene 1.57** - 6.25 2.40-10.09 ND* -

Chrysene 0.68 0.36-1.38 6.31 1.58-17.37 0.35 0.11-0.59

Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND* - 13.21 4.65-26.91 ND* -

Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND* - 10.85** - ND* -

Benzo(a)pyrene ND* - 15.13** - ND* -

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.48** - 12.88 2.38-12.94 0.05** -

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene ND* - 2.06 0.81-3.82 0.29** -

Benzo(g,h,I)perylene 2.22 1.02-3.42 7.53 3.27-12.35 0.84 0.49-1.2 * ND Not Detected - The values of LOD are as follows Naphthalene 0.0448 µg/m³, Acenaphthylene 0.0912µg/m³, Acenaphthene 0.0400 µg/m³, Fluorene 0.0075 µg/m³, Phenanthrene 0.0032

µg/m³, Anthracene 0.0031 µg/m³, Fluoranthene 0.0082 µg/m³, Pyrene 0.0053 µg/m³, Benzo(a)anthrancene 0.0054 µg/m³, Chrysene 0.0041 µg/m³, Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0041 µg/m³, Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0053 µg/m³, Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0049 µg/m³, Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.0049 µg/m³, Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene 0.0048 µg/m³, benzo(g,h,l)perylene 0.0048 µg/m³

** Detected only once

25

BTEX

Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) were analyzed.

Benzene was the major BTEX to which firefighters were exposed. Benzene

was detected in all samples during all three tasks and was present at relatively

higher concentrations than other BTEX. Toluene was detected in three of the

five fire extinguishing activities, in two of the six overhaul activities, and two

of the three investigation activities. Ethylbenzene was detected in two fire

extinguishing, two overhaul, and one fire investigation. Table 6 lists BTEX

concentrations according to tasks.

Table 6. VOC concentrations according to the task

VOCs

Fire extinguishing

N=5

Overhaul

N=6

Investigation

N=3

Median

(ppm)

Range

(ppm)

Median

(ppm)

Range

(ppm)

Median

(ppm)

Range

(ppm)

Benzene 0.681 0.05-12.2 0.177 0.001-

4.66 0.271

0.042-

1.10

Toluene 0.107 0.001-2.09 0.396 0.02-

0.771 0.085

0.052-

0.11

Ethylbenzene 0.21 0.1-0.32 0.091 0.006-

0.18 0.021* -

m,pXyLene 0.245* - 0.057* - 0.071* -

oXylene 0.064 0.05-0.1 0.036* - 0.015* -

* Detected only once

26

Metals

Beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, manganese, lead, arsenic, and

copper were analyzed. Beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, manganese, lead, and

arsenic were not detected in any samples, but chromium was detected in all

samples and copper was detected in samples from three fire extinguishing,

five overhaul, and two fire investigation activities. Table 7 lists metal

concentrations according to tasks.

Table 7. Metals concentrations according to the task

Metals

Fire

extinguishing Median (mg/m³)

N=5

Range

(mg/m³)

Overhaul Median (mg/m³)

N=6

Range

(mg/m³)

Investigation Median (mg/m³)

N=3

Range

(mg/m³)

Be ND - ND - ND -

Cd ND - ND - ND -

Co ND - ND - ND -

Cr 0.018 0.008-

0.024 0.025

0.009-

0.045 0.007

0.003-

0.013

Mn ND - ND - ND -

Pb ND - ND - ND -

As ND - ND - ND -

Cu 0.015 0.013-

0.035 0.014

0.007-

0.036 0.005

0.0047-

0.005

ND Not Detected

27

Particulates

The median values for the concentration of TSP during fire extinguishing,

overhaul, and fire investigation activities were 2.67 mg/m³, 3.10 mg/m³, and

0.69 mg/m³, respectively. The median values of respirable particles were 2.27

mg/m³, 1.17 mg/m³ and 0.45 mg/m³, respectively. Table 8 lists concentrations

according to tasks. The median values for asbestos concentrations during fire

extinguishing, overhaul, and investigation activities were 0.15 fibers/cc, 0.18

fibers/cc, and 0.04 fibers/cc, respectively. Table 9 lists concentrations

according to tasks.

Table 8. Particulates concentrations according to the task

Analyte

Fire extinguishing

N=5

Overhaul

N=6

Investigation

N=3

Median

(mg/m³)

Range

(mg/m³)

Median

(mg/m³)

Range

(mg/m³)

Median

(mg/m³)

Range

(mg/m³)

Total

suspended

particulate

2.67 1.90-4.89 3.10 1.11-7.61 0.69 0.13-1.52

Respirable

particles

2.27 0.17-3.75 1.17 0.28-7.55 0.45 0.08-0.48

Table 9. Asbestos concentrations according to the task

Analyte

Fire extinguishing

N=5

Overhaul

N=6

Investigation

N=3

Median

(fibers/cc)

Range

(fibers/cc)

Median

(fibers/cc)

Range

(fibers/cc)

Median

(fibers/cc)

Range

(fibers/cc)

Asbestos 0.15 0.09-0.18 0.18 0.14-0.36 0.04 0.04-0.05

28

3.1. Statistical analysis

The Mann-Whitney U test analysis was conducted with the two groups to

compare the concentration levels of frequently detected substances between

the tasks, but showed no significant differences(P>0.05). The result of Mann-

Whitney U test analysis was shown in table 10.

Table 10. The result of comparison of two tasks

Substance Task N Median Range p-value

Naphthalene

fire

extinguishing 5 93.95

6.22-

2082.68 0.548

overhaul 6 49.59 0.24-

279.13

Chrysene

fire

extinguishing 5 0.68 0.36-1.38

0.421

overhaul 6 6.31 1.58-

17.37

Benzene

fire

extinguishing 5 0.681

0.046-

12.199 0.421

overhaul 6 0.210 0.027-

4.66

Toluene

fire

extinguishing 5 0.107

0.001-

2.094 0.548

overhaul 6 0.396 0.020-

0.771

TSP

fire

extinguishing 5 2.67 1.90-4.89

0.841

overhaul 6 3.10 1.11-7.61

29

A multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify correlations between

concentration levels and factors such as task, confinement state, number of

firefighters dispatched, work time, number of mobilized equipment, property

damage, and building materials as independent variables. A correlation was

observed between concentration level and confinement state. Table 11 lists

the results of the multiple regression analysis.

Table 11. Confinement state associated with concentrations

Substance Variable β Adjusted

R² p-value

Naphthalene

Confinement

state

747.85 0.191 0.009

Chrysene 6.349 -0.020 0.011

Benzene 5.086 0.415 0.004

Toluene 0.74 0.201 0.016

TSP 4.12 0.526 0.020

Other factor as follow; task, confinement state, number of people dispatched, work time,

number of mobilized equipment, property damage, and building structure were not significant,

therefore the results of multiple regression were not shown in table.

30

4. Discussion

This study investigated the chemical hazards that firefighters are exposed to

while conducting three kinds of tasks at live fire scenes. The results

demonstrated that the firefighters were exposed to hazardous substances such

as benzene and PAH, as well as particulates. Several previous studies have

been performed during fire extinguishing or overhaul tasks, but few studies

have included fire investigation. Table 12 compares concentrations according

to task. PAH was detected at every fire scene. Naphthalene, which the IARC

categorizes as Group 2B (possible carcinogenic substance), was present at

concentrations higher than those recorded in previous studies of fire

extinguishing and overhaul cases. The highest concentration of naphthalene

(2082.6 µg/m3) was detected in a sample from a fire extinguishing task in a

sauna in a public bath. This fire scene was located in the basement, which was

filled with smoke upon arrival due to poor ventilation. However, this level did

not exceed the ACGIH TWA maximum value of 50000 µg/m3.

Concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene, which is a well-known carcinogen that

causes lung cancer, stomach cancer, and skin cancer among the PAHs

(Sadikovic, 2006), is known to range from 1–50 µg/m3 at fire scenes. In the

present study, benzo(a)pyrene was detected at a concentration of 10.85 µg/m3

during one overhaul task (in a sauna at a public bath).

Benzene, which is known to cause leukemia and is categorized as a Group 1

carcinogen by the IARC, was detected in all samples collected during fire

extinguishing and fire investigation tasks, and was detected in every case but

31

one during overhaul tasks. Benzene was detected at relatively high

concentrations compared to other BTEX. Previous studies have reported that

benzene concentrations during firefighting can exceed the ACGIH TLV of 0.5

ppm. In this study, a concentration of 12.12 ppm was detected in a sample

from one fire extinguishing activity: this significantly exceeds the ACGIH

TLV maximum. This high concentration may have occurred because that the

fire was in a confined underground sauna with poor ventilation. Benzene

levels also exceeded the ACGIH TLV maximum in one case of fire

extinguishing, two cases of overhaul, and one case of fire investigation.

TSP levels in samples ranged from 0.13–7.61 mg/m³. The highest

concentration was detected during an overhaul task in an apartment; because

all windows were closed, this fire scene was poorly ventilated.

The highest level of respirable particles (7.55 mg/m3) was also detected

during an overhaul task in an apartment. Respirable particle levels exceeded

the ACGIH TWA maximum (3 mg/m3) in two fire extinguishing tasks and

one overhaul task. These findings were similar to those of other studies, but

Johnson (2000) reported higher concentrations of TSP and RSP: 30.79 mg/m3

and 80.1 mg/m3, respectively.

Asbestos can be released after a building collapses (Lee, 2010). Among the 14

case analyses conducted using PCM, some samples could not be identified

due to black ashes collected in the filter. However, PCM analysis revealed

32

that two cases of fire extinguishing and four cases of overhaul exceeded the

ACGIH TWA of 0.1 fibers/cc. It is important to note that the PCM technique

is only used to assess the form of particles and calculate the concentration by

counting the fibrous particles, which may include both asbestos fibers and

non-asbestos fiber particles; therefore, overestimation is possible.

33

Table 12. Comparison of preceding firefighters exposure studies with this

study and health effects of substances

number

of fires

fire extinguish overhaul investigation

min max min max min max

Naphthelene

(µg/m³)

This study 14 6.22 2082.6 0.24 279.13 17.43 623.01

Kim(2007) 9 10.5 1106 - - - -

Dawn(2000) 25 - - 73 540 - -

Baxter(2014) 5 - - 0.00262 0.00567 - -

Benzo(a)pyrene

(µg/m³)

This study 14 ND ND 10.85 10.85 ND ND

Kim(2007) 9 ND 48 - - - -

Dawn(2000) 25 - - 18.7 50 - -

Jankovic(1991) 3 - 40 - 1 - -

Chrysene (µg/m³)

This study 14 0.36 1.38 1.58 17.37 0.11 0.59

Kim(2007) 9 0.0001 0.09 - - - -

Dawn(2000) 25 - - 12.9 - - -

Jankovic(1991) 3 - 0.02 - 0.003 - -

Benzen (ppm)

This study 14 0.05 12.2 0.001 4.66 0.04 1.10

Kim(2007) 9 ND 19.05 - - - -

Dawn(2000) 25 - - 0.07 1.99 - -

Austin (2001) 9 0.12 10.76 - - - -

Jankovic (1991) 22 ND 22 ND 0.3 - -

Toluen (ppm)

This study 14 0.001 2.09 0.02 0.771 0.052 0.11

Kim(2007) 9 ND 3.18 - - - -

Brandt-Rauf(1988) 14 0.16 0.28 - - - -

TSP (mg/m3)

This study 14 1.90 4.89 1.11 7.61 0.13 1.52

Dawn(2000) 25 - - 0.06 0.53 - -

Johnson(2000) 25 - - 0.36 30.79 - -

Kinnes(1998) 5 3.5 31.6 - - - -

RSP (mg/m3)

This study 14 0.17 3.75 0.28 7.55 0.08 0.48

Kim(2007) 9 0.39 2.96 - - - -

Dawn(2000) 25 - - 0.71 25.7 - -

ND Not detected

- Not sampled

34

The Mann-Whitney U test analysis (a non-parametric testing method) was

used to compare concentration levels between fire extinguishing and overhaul

tasks, but no significant differences were observed among the two groups

(P>0.05). Multiple regression analysis was used to identify any correlations

between concentration levels and factors such as task, confinement state,

number of firefighters dispatched, work time, number of mobilized

equipment, property damage, and building structure as independent variables.

A correlation was found between concentration levels and confinement state

(P<0.05).

Every fire scene analyzed in this study was within a building. In modern

buildings, the majority of components such as carpets, wallpaper, and

furniture contain polyethylene and PVC, which produce a variety of toxic

chemicals including carcinogens when burned. Firefighters entering a site to

rescue victims (the highest priority among fire extinguishing activities), and

those conducting fire extinguishing operations near a fire, are required to wear

a self-contained breathing apparatus. However, firefighters who drive to a fire

site, as well as supervisors, communications personnel, paramedics, and

firefighters who maintain a distance and use fire hoses do not wear air

respirators. Furthermore, firefighters may enter a scene without wearing an air

respirator due to communication problems during overhaul and fire

investigation, or due to physical exhaustion and heat. This means they may be

directly exposed to harmful factors that may have an effect on their health.

Exposure to toxic gases and particulates during fire extinguishing, overhaul,

35

and fire investigation tasks should therefore be considered in terms of health

effects. Many toxic gases are produced during a fire and remain in the

atmosphere, such benzene, respirable particles, and PAHs. The environment is

not as hot or smoky during overhaul or fire investigation tasks as it is during

knockdown, but it still contains products of combustion from small fires or

smoldering material. Our results demonstrate that firefighters require self-

contained breathing apparatus during fire extinguishing, overhaul, and fire

investigation tasks. Our results also reveal that the environment of the fire

site, such as the confinement state, has more influence than concentration

levels on firefighter exposure. However, differences in the level of exposure

can result from a lack of firefighter awareness about exposure during different

tasks (i.e., fire extinguishing, overhaul, and fire investigation), and from not

wearing protection.

One limitation of this study is that each fire scene has different

characteristics; the type and amount of materials varies, making it difficult to

identify trends within each task. Previous studies have also reported

difficulties in estimating the type and amount of substance: actual fire scenes

differ so greatly that direct comparison is challenging.

Currently, occupational exposure limits regarding the task of the firefighters

are non-existent. Evaluation of exposure at fire scenes should not be limited to

one or two projects; work environments of firefighters should be regularly

measured to create a database from collected data. In addition, further

statistical analysis is required in future studies.

36

5. Conclusion

This study examined hazardous substances during fire extinguishing,

overhaul, and fire investigation activities. The environment during overhaul

and fire investigation tasks may not appear as dangerous as during fire

extinguishing tasks, but it may still contain hazardous combustion products.

Therefore, firefighters may be exposed to hazardous substances exceeding

safe standards not only during fire extinguishing, but also during overhaul and

fire investigation. In particular, firefighters may be exposed to carcinogens

such as benzene or PAHs; therefore, a self-contained breathing apparatus

must be worn to minimize exposure to hazardous substances during overhaul

and fire investigation. Although the fires that occurred during this study

period were in different locations and it was not possible to repeat the same

fire scenes due to the nature of fire accidents, these results can inform future

occupational health research for firefighters working in fire scenes that are

difficult to access. They may also be used to inform research about health

hazards to firefighters, and may provide a basis for assessing exposure and

improving the work environments of firefighters.

37

6. References

Han. A. R., John. A. L., Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer and Reproductive

Hazards in Firefighters. Journal of Korea Medical Association 2008, 51(12):

1097 - 1102.

Austin. C. C, Wang D, Ecobichon D. J., Dussault. G., Characterization of

volatile organic compounds in smoke at municipal structural fires. Journal of

Toxicology and Environmental Health 2001, 63:437–458.

Brandt. P.W., Fallon. L.F., Tarantini. T., Health hazards of fire fighters:

exposure assessment, British Journal of Industrial Medicine 1988, 45:606–

612.

Baxter. C. S, Clara. S.R., Thomas. F., Jacob. L. B., Jamila. S., Pravinray. D.

G., James. M. D., MArch, James. E. L., Ultrafine particle exposure during fire

extinguishing is it an important contributory factor for coronary heart disease

in firefighters? Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 2010,

52(8): 791-796.

Baxter. C. S., Joseph. D. H., Michael. J. K., Tiina. R., Erin. N. H., Exposure

of Firefighters to Particulates and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, Journal

of Occupational and Environmental

Hygiene 2014, DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2014.890286

Sadikovic. B., D. I. R., Benzopyrene exposure disrupts DNA methylation and

growth dynamics in breast cancer cells, Toxicology and Applied

Pharmacology 2006, 216: 458-468.

38

Clough, T. L. G. a. V. M., Occupational health concerns of fire extinguishing.

Annual Review of Public Health 1992, 13: 151-171.

Daniels. R.D., K. T., Yiin. J.H., Mortality and cancer incidence in a pooled

cohort of US firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia

(1950–2009). Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2013. Published

Online First doi:10.1136/oemed-2013-101662.

Dawn. M., Johnson. B., J. L. B., Clifton. D. C., Steve. S., Richard. G., Wilson.

J. R., Characterization of Firefighter Exposures During Fire Overhaul,

American Industrial Hygiene Association 2000, 61(5): 636-641.

Pukkala. E., J. I. M., Elisabete. W., Kristina. K., Elsebeth. L., Laufey. T., Pär.

S., Paul. A. D., Cancer incidence among firefighters: 45 years of follow-up in

five Nordic countries, Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2014, (0):

1-7.

LeMasters. G. K., Ash. M. G., Paul. S., James. D., Tarek. S., Heriberto. B. V.,

Kari. D., James. L., Cancer Risk Among Firefighters: A Review and Meta-

analysis of 32 Studies. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

2006, 48(11): 1189-1202.

Seoul Metropolitan Fire & Disaster Headquarters(S. M. F. D.). Fire statistics

2012.

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), IARC Monographs on

the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, v. p., fire extinguishing, and

shiftwork. Lyon, France 2010.

Jankovic. J., Jones. W., Burkhart. J., Noonan. G., Environmental study of

firefighters. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene 1991, 35:581–

602.doi:10.1093/annhyg/35.6.581 PMID:1768008.

39

Jung. T. H., Respiratory Diseases in Firefighters and Fire Exposers, Journal of

Korea Medical Association 51(12): 1087-1096. (2008)

Kim. J. I., Characterization of Firefighter Exposures during Overhaul and

Investigation, Ph. D. Dissertation 2007, Seoul National University, Seoul,

Korea.

Kim. J. M., Hazards Exposed to Firefighters in Fire - Physical, Chemical, and

Biologic factors, Journal of Korea Medical Association 2008, 51(12): 1072 -

1077 51(12): 1072-1077.

Timonen. K. L., Hartog. J., Angela. I. M., Bert. B., Diane. R. G., Heinrich. J.,

Hoek. G., Lanki. T., Annette, Peters. T. T., Tittanen. P., Kreyling. W.,

Pekkanen. J., Effects of ultrafine and fine particulate and gaseous air pollution

on cardiac autonomic control in subjects with coronary artery disease: The

ULTRA study. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental

Epidemiology 2006, 16: 332-341.

Kim. K.S., Health Hazards in Firefighters, Hanyang Medical Reviews 2010,

30(4): 296-304.

Lee. J.I., The Risk and Countermeasures of Asbestos Exposure at the Scene

Activities of Fire Officials. Korea Institute of Fire Science and Engineering

2010, 24(5): 68-78.

Miranda. A. I., Martins. V., Cascão. P., Amorim. J. H., Valente. J, Borrego.

C., Ferreira. A. J., Cordeiro, Domingos. C. R., Viegas. X., Ottmar. R.,

Wildland Smoke Exposure Values and Exhaled Breath Indicators in

Firefighters, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 2012, Part A:

Current Issues, 75:13-15, 831-843, DOI: 10.1080/15287394.2012.690686.

40

Peters. A., W. H., Tuch. T., Heinrich. J., Heyder. J., Respiratory effects are

associated with the number of ultrafine particles. American Journal of

Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1997, 155(4):1376-83.

Rabinowitz. P.M., Acute inhalation injury, Clinics in Chest Medicine 2002,

23: 707-715.

Reisen. F., Brown. S. K., Australian firefighters' exposure to air toxics during

bushfire burns of autumn 2005 and 2006, Environment International 2009,

35(2): 342-352.

Yong. C. J., A Study on Occupational Disease of Firefighter, Ph. D.

Dissertation 2008, Dept of Fire Protection & Urban Disaster Management

Graduate School of Industrial Technology & Information.

41

Appendix

Appendix 1. Xad-2 and filter concentration of PAH during fire extinguish

PAH

(µg/m³)

site 1 site 2 site 3 site 4 site 5

Laundry Outlet store Temporary Building Underground parking lot Sauna in Public bath

Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total

Naphthalene 93.947 ND 93.947 193.30

6 ND

193.30

6 6.215 ND 6.215 7.986 ND 7.986

2082.68

4 ND

2082.68

4

Acenaphthylene 13.319 ND 13.319 24.756 ND 24.756 ND ND ND ND ND ND 58.499 ND 58.499

Acenaphthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Fluorene 2.593 ND 2.593 4.461 ND 4.461 0.284 ND 0.284 0.456 ND 0.456 15.991 0.272 16.263

Phenanthrene 0.942 ND 0.942 16.560 ND 16.560 0.349 ND 0.349 0.771 0.321 1.092 12.116 0.750 12.867

Anthracene 1.695 ND 1.695 2.925 ND 2.925 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Fluoranthene ND 0.789 0.789 2.660 0.609 3.268 ND ND ND ND 0.448 0.448 ND 0.477 0.477

Pyrene ND 0.467 0.467 1.879 0.061 1.941 ND ND ND ND 0.415 0.415 ND 0.216 0.216

Benzo(a)anthrancene ND 1.565 1.565 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Chrysene ND 1.382 1.382 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.679 0.679 ND 0.357 0.357

Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzo(a)pyrene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene ND 0.479 0.479 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzo(g,h,I)perylene ND 3.421 3.421 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.023 1.023

ND Not Detected

42

Appendix 2. Xad-2 and filter concentration of PAH during overhaul

PAH

(µg/m³)

site 1 site 2 site 3 site 4 site 5 site 6

Laundry Outlet store Apartment Temporary Building underground parking lot Sauna in Public bath

Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total

Naphthalene 12.175 ND 12.175 87.007 ND 87.007 279.125 ND 279.125 9.974 ND 9.974 0.243 ND 0.243 100.913 ND 100.913

Acenaphthylene ND ND ND 10.396 ND 10.396 28.009 ND 28.009 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.106 ND 1.106

Acenaphthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Fluorene ND ND ND 2.852 ND 2.852 5.465 ND 5.465 0.165 ND 0.165 ND ND ND ND 0.696 0.696

Phenanthrene ND ND ND 7.785 3.273 11.058 19.848 2.217 22.066 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 39.880 39.880

Anthracene ND ND ND 1.376 ND 1.376 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Fluoranthene ND ND ND 2.029 2.966 4.995 11.692 5.245 16.937 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 38.039 38.039

Pyrene ND ND ND 1.367 2.291 3.658 13.059 5.972 19.030 ND ND ND ND 0.667 0.667 ND 25.638 25.638

Benzo(a)anthrancene ND ND ND ND 2.396 2.396 ND 10.095 10.095 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Chrysene ND ND ND ND 2.403 2.403 ND 10.220 10.220 ND ND ND ND 1.579 1.579 ND 15.223 15.223

Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND 4.654 4.654 ND 26.906 26.906 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 22.326 22.326

Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 5.119 5.119

Benzo(a)pyrene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.589 8.589

Indeno(1,2,3-

c,d)pyrene ND ND ND ND 2.383 2.383 ND 12.883 12.883 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 7.143 7.143

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene 0.811 ND 0.811 ND 2.057 2.057 ND 3.822 3.822 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzo(g,h,I)perylene ND ND ND ND 3.266 3.266 ND 12.347 12.347 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 24.494 24.494

43

Appendix 3. Xad-2 and filter concentration of PAH during fire investigation

PAH

(µg/m³)

site 1 site 2 site 3

Printing house Sauna in Public bath Restaurant congested buildings

Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total Xad-2 Filter Total

Naphthalene 17.429 ND 17.429 618.260 ND 618.260 ND ND ND

Acenaphthylene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Acenaphthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Fluorene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Phenanthrene ND 0.924 0.924 ND 0.880 0.880 ND ND ND

Anthracene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Fluoranthene ND ND ND ND 0.777 0.777 ND ND ND

Pyrene ND 0.135 0.135 ND 0.400 0.400 ND ND ND

Benzo(a)anthrancene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Chrysene ND 0.112 0.112 ND 0.594 0.594 ND ND ND

Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzo(a)pyrene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.047 ND 0.047

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.294 ND 0.294

Benzo(g,h,I)perylene ND 1.202 1.202 ND ND ND 0.487 ND 0.487

ND Not Detected

44

Appendix 4. Recovery efficiency of metals

Conc.

(㎎) N

Recovery of filter (%)

Be Cd Co Cr Mn Pb As Cu

100 3 108.3

± 4.5

104.9

± 4.8

101.8

± 5.2

102.6

± 4.8

98.3 ±

4.1

86.7 ±

3.8

99.5 ±

8.2

92.2 ±

5.1

200 3 115.5

± 8.7

111.9

± 13.2

109.8

± 13.8

107.4

± 9.5

103.7

± 7.6

90 ±

9.4

116.4

± 14.2

102.1

± 7.4

400 3 125.6

± 4.6

119.1

± 4.2

116.9

± 4.2

117.9

± 3.1

112.0

± 3.9

97 ±

2.6

115.2

± 7.2

116.4

± 4.9

Total 9 116.5

± 7.1

112.0

± 5.7

109.5

± 6.1

109.3

± 6.3

104.7

± 5.6 91.3 ±

4.2

108.1

± 7.6

103.6

± 9.9

Appendix 5. Desorption efficiency of BTEX

Conc.

(㎕) N

Desorption efficiency of adsorbent (%)

Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene m,p-

xylene o-xylene

5 3 120.7 ±

9.1

91.3 ±

2.2 87.2 ± 1.9

85.7 ±

1.4

83.1 ±

1.6

20 3 111.6 ±

2.9

91.3 ±

0.9 91.3 ± 0.7

89.2 ±

0.9

87.1 ±

0.5

100 3 103.9 ±

2.3

96.1 ±

1.8 97.5 ± 2.0

95.2 ±

2.0

93.2 ±

2.0

Total 9 112.1 ±

6.8

92.9 ±

2.2 92.0 ± 4.2

90.0 ±

3.9

87.8 ±

4.1

45

Appendix 6. Summary data for fire extinguishing PAHs samples

Analyte

Number

of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(µg/m³) MIN(µg/m³) MAX(µg/m³)

Naphthalene 5 93.95 6.22 2082.68

Acenaphthylene 3 24.76 13.32 120.10

Acenaphthene 1 7.28 - -

Fluorene 5 2.59 0.28 24.87

Phenanthrene 5 1.09 0.35 17.29

Anthracene 3 2.91 1.69 2.92

Fluoranthene 4 0.63 0.45 3.27

Pyrene 4 0.44 0.22 1.94

Benzo(a)anthrancene 1 1.57 - -

Chrysene 3 0.68 0.36 1.38

Benzo(b)fluoranthene - ND ND ND

Benzo(k)fluoranthene - ND ND ND

Benzo(a)pyrene - ND ND ND

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1 0.48 - -

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene - ND ND ND

ND Not Detected

46

Appendix 7. Summary data for overhaul PAHs samples

Analyte

Number

of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(µg/m³) MIN(µg/m³) MAX(µg/m³)

Naphthalene 6 49.59 0.24 279.13

Acenaphthylene 3 10.40 1.11 28.01

Acenaphthene - ND ND ND

Fluorene 4 2.05 0.17 5.46

Phenanthrene 3 22.07 11.06 43.43

Anthracene 2 6.73 1.38 12.09

Fluoranthene 3 16.94 4.99 44.14

Pyrene 4 11.34 0.67 34.89

Benzo(a)anthrancene 2 6.25 2.40 10.09

Chrysene 4 6.31 1.58 17.37

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3 13.21 4.65 26.91

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1 10.85 - -

Benzo(a)pyrene 1 15.131 - -

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 3 12.88 2.38 12.94

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene 3 2.06 0.81 3.82

47

Appendix 8. Summary data for investigation PAHs samples

Analyte

Number

of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(µg/m³) MIN(µg/m³) MAX(µg/m³)

Naphthalene 2 320.22 17.43 623.01

Acenaphthylene 1 33.42 - -

Acenaphthene 1 2.81 - -

Fluorene 1 6.10 - -

Phenanthrene 2 2.18 0.92 3.44

Anthracene 1 0.97 - -

Fluoranthene 1 0.78 - -

Pyrene 2 0.27 0.13 0.40

Benzo(a)anthrancene - ND ND ND

Chrysene 2 0.35 0.11 0.59

Benzo(b)fluoranthene - ND ND ND

Benzo(k)fluoranthene - ND ND ND

Benzo(a)pyrene - ND ND ND

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1 0.05 - -

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrancene 1 0.29 - -

ND Not Detected

48

Appendix 9. Summary data for fire extinguishing VOCs samples

Analyte

Number of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(ppm) MIN(ppm) MAX(ppm)

Benzene 6 0.681 0.046 12.199

Toluene 4 0.107 0.001 2.094

Ethylbenzene 2 0.210 0.102 0.319

m,p-Xylene 1 0.245 - -

o-Xylene 2 0.064 0.017 0.110

Appendix 10. Summary data for overhaul VOCs samples

Analyte

Number of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(ppm) MIN(ppm) MAX(ppm)

Benzene 6 0.177 0.001 4.660

Toluene 2 0.396 0.020 0.771

Ethylbenzene 2 0.091 0.006 0.177

m,p-Xylene 1 0.057 - -

o-Xylene 1 0.036 - -

Appendix 11. Summary data for fire extinguishing VOCs samples

Analyte

Number of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(ppm) MIN(ppm) MAX(ppm)

Benzene 3 0.271 0.042 1.103

Toluene 2 0.085 0.052 0.117

Ethylbenzene 1 0.021 - -

m,p-Xylene 1 0.071 - -

o-Xylene 1 0.015 - -

49

Appendix 12. Summary data for fire extinguishing metals samples

Analyte

Number of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(mg/m³) MIN(mg/m³) MAX(mg/m³)

Be - ND ND ND

Cd - ND ND ND

Co - ND ND ND

Cr 5 0.018 0.008 0.024

Mn - ND ND ND

Pb - ND ND ND

As - ND ND ND

Cu 3 0.015 0.013 0.035

ND Not Detected

Appendix 13. Summary data for overhaul metals samples

Analyte

Number of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(mg/m³) MIN(mg/m³) MAX(mg/m³)

Be - ND ND ND

Cd - ND ND ND

Co - ND ND ND

Cr 6 0.025 0.009 0.045

Mn - ND ND ND

Pb - ND ND ND

As - ND ND ND

Cu 5 0.014 0.007 0.036

ND Not Detected

50

Appendix 14. Summary data for investigation metals samples

Analyte

Number of

Samples

above

LOD

Median(mg/m³) MIN(mg/m³) MAX(mg/m³)

Be - ND ND ND

Cd - ND ND ND

Co - ND ND ND

Cr 3 0.007 0.003 0.013

Mn - ND ND ND

Pb - ND ND ND

As - ND ND ND

Cu 2 0.005 0.005 0.005

ND Not Detected

51

Appendix 15. Summary data for fire extinguishing particulate

samples

Analyte

Median(mg/m³) MIN(mg/m³) MAX(mg/m³)

Total suspended

particulate

2.67 1.897 4.890

Respirable

particles

2.27 0.167 3.754

Appendix 16. Summary data for overhaul particulate samples

Analyte

Median(mg/m³) MIN(mg/m³) MAX(mg/m³)

Total

suspended

particulate

3.100 1.109 7.608

Respirable

particles

1.165 0.284 7.550

Appendix 17. Summary data for investigation particulate samples

Analyte

Median(mg/m³) MIN(mg/m³) MAX(mg/m³)

Total

suspended

particulate

0.686 0.135 0.225

Respirable

particles

0.448 0.076 0.481

52

Appendix 18. Summary of Sample site concentration

Analyte

site 1 site 2 site 3 site 4 site 5 site 6 site 7 site 8

Laundry Outlet store Apartment Temporary

Building Printing house

Underground

parking lot Sauna in Public bath

Restaurant

congested

buildings

Fire

extinguishing overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul investigation

Fire

extinguishing overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul investigation investigation

PAH

(µg/m³)

Naphthalene 93.947 12.175 193.306 87.007 279.125 6.215 9.974 17.429 7.986 0.243 2082.68 100.913 623.006 ND

Acenaphthylene 13.319 ND 24.756 10.396 28.009 ND ND ND ND ND 120.096 1.106 33.417 ND

Acenaphthene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 7.281 ND 2.814 ND

Fluorene 2.593 ND 4.461 2.852 5.465 0.284 0.165 ND 0.456 ND 24.871 1.244 6.099 ND

Phenanthrene 0.942 ND 16.560 11.058 22.066 0.349 ND 0.924 1.092 ND 17.286 43.432 3.442 ND

Anthracene 1.695 ND 2.925 1.376 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.912 12.091 0.967 ND

Fluoranthene 0.789 ND 3.268 4.995 16.937 ND ND ND 0.448 ND 0.477 44.137 0.777 ND

Pyrene 0.467 ND 1.941 3.658 19.030 ND ND 0.135 0.415 0.667 0.216 34.886 0.400 ND

Benzo(a)anthrance

ne 1.565 ND ND 2.396 10.095 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Chrysene 1.382 ND ND 2.403 10.220 ND ND 0.112 0.679 1.579 0.357 17.369 0.594 ND

Benzo(b)fluoranth

ene ND ND ND 4.654 26.906 ND ND ND ND ND ND 13.207 ND ND

Benzo(k)fluoranth

ene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 10.849 ND ND

53

Analyte

site 1 site 2 site 3 site 4 site 5 site 6 site 7 site 8

Laundry Outlet store Apartment Temporary

Building Printing house

Underground

parking lot Sauna in Public bath

Restaurant

congested buildings

Fire

extinguishing overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul investigation

Fire

extinguishing overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul investigation investigation

Benzo(a)pyrene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 15.131 ND ND

Indeno(1,2,3-

c,d)pyrene 0.479 ND ND 2.383 12.883 ND ND ND ND ND ND 12.936 ND 0.047

Dibenzo(a,h)anthra

ncene ND 0.811 ND 2.057 3.822 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.294

Benzo(g,h,I)peryle

ne 3.421 ND ND 3.266 12.347 ND ND 1.202 ND ND 1.023 7.532 ND 0.487

BTEX

(ppm)

Benzene 0.243 0.027 1.195 0.210 2.068 0.046 ND 0.042 0.118 0.144 12.199 4.660 1.103 0.271

Toluene ND ND 0.116 ND 0.020 ND ND 0.052 0.001 ND 2.094 0.771 0.117 ND

Ethylbenzene 0.319 0.177 ND ND ND ND ND 0.021 ND ND 0.102 0.006 ND ND

m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.071 ND ND 0.245 0.057 ND ND

o-Xylene 0.110 0.036 ND ND ND ND ND 0.015 ND ND 0.017 ND ND ND

Metals

(mg/m³)

Be ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Cd ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Co ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

54

Analyte

site 1 site 2 site 3 site 4 site 5 site 6 site 7 site 8

Laundry Outlet store Apartment Temporary

Building Printing house

Underground

parking lot Sauna in Public bath

Restaurant

congested buildings

Fire

extinguishing overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul investigation

Fire

extinguishing overhaul

Fire

extinguishing overhaul investigation investigation

Cr 0.023 0.021 0.024 0.028 0.045 0.018 0.019 0.007 0.012 0.031 0.008 0.009 0.013 0.003

Mn ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Pb ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

As ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Cu ND ND ND 0.014 0.036 0.013 0.007 0.005 0.015 0.021 0.035 0.009 0.005 ND

Fiber

(fibers/cc) Asbestos 0.090 0.144 * 0.203 * 0.148 0.150 0.038 0.177 0.361 * * 0.050 0.037

Particulate

(mg/m³)

Total suspended

particulate 1.897 1.109 3.106 1.631 7.608 2.237 3.125 0.686 4.890 3.075 * 5.918 1.520 0.135

Respirable

particles 1.281 0.950 3.754 1.380 7.550 0.167 0.936 0.481 3.652 0.284 2.273 1.473 0.448 0.076

ND Not Detected

* Data unavailable due to sampling not performed properly

55

국문초록

연구목적 최근 소방공무원의 사망, 사고와 관련된 안전문제와 직업

적 노출로 인한 건강과 보건의 문제가 사회적으로 대두되고 있다.

소방공무원은 화재진압이나 잔화정리 과정에서 발암물질 등 다양한

유해인자에 노출되고 있으며, 국제암연구소(IARC)에서는 발암가능

성 물질에 노출되는 직업군 GROUP2B로 규정하고 있다.

그러나 소방공무원이라는 직업 매트릭스에 의한 역학연구는 국내

외에서 이루어지고 있지만 화재진압의 과정의 유해인자 노출평가에

관한 연구는 흔치 않으며, 구체적인 작업에 따른 노출평가 연구는

거의 이루어지지 않았다. 따라서 이 연구를 통하여 화재현장에서 화

재진압, 잔화정리, 화재조사에 따라 소방공무원들에게 노출되는 유

해물질의 종류와 농도를 확인하고 소방공무원 건강유해인자에 대한

연구 자료를 확보하고자 한다.

연구방법 해당 소방서 관내에서 발생한 화재를 대상으로 세탁소,

아울렛, 아파트, 주거용 가건물, 인쇄소, 지하 주차장, 대중목욕탕

사우나, 식당밀집지역 건물화재까지 총 8건의 실제 화재현장에서

14 케이스의 작업에 대하여 소방공무원들의 개인시료 측정을 실시

하였다. 소방공무원들의 작업을 화재진압, 잔화정리, 화재조사로 구

56

분하여 총 분진, 호흡성 분진, 석면, 벤젠, 톨루엔, 에틸벤젠, 자일

렌, 중금속(카드뮴, 크롬, 납 등 총8 종), 다환방향족탄화수소(나프

탈렌 등 총16 종)에 대해 개인시료채취를 실시하여 분석하였다.

연구결과 PAH는 ACGIH TLV 기준에 초과하는 건은 없었지만 모

든 측정에서 검출되었다. 나프탈렌은 최소 0.24 ppm 최대 279.13

mg/m3(중앙값 49.6 mg/m3), 벤조피렌은 잔화정리에서 10.85

µg/m3 으로 1건 검출되었다. 벤젠은 최소 0.01 ppm 최대 12.2

ppm 으로 세 작업 모두에서 검출되었으며 화재진압에서 2건, 잔화

정리에서 2건, 화재조사에서 1건에서 ACGIH TLV(0.5 ppm)를 초

과하였다. 호흡성 분진은 최소 0.08 최대 7.55 mg/m3로 검출되었

으며 ACGIH TLV(3 mg/m3)에 화재진압에서 1건, 잔화정리에서 1

건 초과하였다.

결론 조사된 모든 화재의 화재진압, 잔화정리 그리고 화재조사에서

발암물질 뿐만 아니라 다양한 유해물질이 검출되었다. 벤젠과 호흡

성 분진은 세 작업 모두에서 매우 높은 농도로 검출되어 위험해 보

이지 않는 잔화정리와 화재조사에서도 소방공무원은 다양한 유해물

질에 노출되고 있는 것으로 나타났다.

Key word: 소방관 노출, 화재진압, 잔화정리, 화재조사

학번 : 2012-21849